Date of Decision: August 27, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1C (Multinational Managers or Executives)
Field of Expertise: Multinational Executive Management
Beneficiary Information
Profession: President
Field: Multinational Executive Management
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Case Overview
The Petitioner, a California-based company engaged in wine distribution, real estate development, and the export of construction materials to China, sought to employ the Beneficiary as its president under the EB-1C classification for multinational executives or managers. The Beneficiary was previously employed by the parent company in China, which specializes in international trading and sales of water treatment and air purification products. The Form I-140 petition aimed to secure permanent residency for the Beneficiary as a multinational executive.
Key Issues
The primary issues leading to the denial were the failure to establish that the Beneficiary’s foreign parent company was conducting business at the time of filing and the lack of evidence proving that the Beneficiary was employed in an executive capacity. Additionally, there were concerns regarding the Petitioner’s continuous business operations and the existence of a qualifying relationship between the Petitioner and the foreign entity.
USCIS Findings
The USCIS determined that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that the foreign parent company was actively conducting business, a requirement to establish a multinational relationship. Moreover, the documentation provided failed to demonstrate the Beneficiary’s role in a managerial or executive capacity, which is essential for the EB-1C classification. The lack of certified English translations of key documents further weakened the petitioner’s case, leading to the dismissal of both the motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider.
Supporting Evidence
Key pieces of evidence included business licenses, sales agreements, and payroll summaries. However, these documents were deemed insufficient or non-compliant with USCIS requirements due to incomplete translations and lack of certification, which significantly diminished their evidentiary value.
Additional Notes
The USCIS highlighted the importance of maintaining a continuous and verifiable business relationship between the U.S. petitioner and the foreign entity throughout the entire petition process. The absence of reliable evidence in this regard played a critical role in the denial of the petition.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider were both dismissed, reaffirming the denial of the EB-1C petition.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
